Benchmark: eSetting Canvas Pixel2

HTML Preparation code:

<canvas id="c" width="800" height="300"></canvas>

Script Preparation code:

$c = document.getElementById('c');
$ctx = $c.getContext('2d', { alpha: false });
$ctx.clearRect(0, 0, 800, 300);
$px = $ctx.createImageData(2, 2);
$pxls = [];
for (var i=0; i<10000; ++i) $pxls.push({
   x: (Math.random() * 400 << 0) * 2,
   y: (Math.random() * 150 << 0) * 2,
   r: Math.random() * 255 << 0,
   g: Math.random() * 255 << 0,
   b: Math.random() * 255 << 0,
   a: 255
});
$i = 0;

Tests:

fillRect/concat
for (var i=200;i--;){ var px = $pxls[$i++ % 10000]; $ctx.fillStyle = 'rgba(' + px.r + ',' + px.g + ',' + px.b + ',' + (px.a / 255) + ')'; $ctx.fillRect(px.x*2, px.y*2, 2, 2); }
1×1 Image Data
for (var i=200;i--;){ var px=$pxls[$i++ % 10000], d=$px.data; d[0] = px.r; d[1] = px.g; d[2] = px.b; d[3] = px.a; $ctx.putImageData($px, px.x, px.y); }

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
fillRect/concat
1×1 Image Data

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Latest run results:

No previous run results

This benchmark does not have any results yet. Be the first one to run it!

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated one year ago):

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

Let's break down the provided benchmark and explain what's being tested, compared, and considered.

**Benchmark Definition JSON**

The `Script Preparation Code` section initializes a canvas element with an ID of "c" and sets up a 2D drawing context (`$ctx`) for it. It then creates an image data object (`$px`) representing a 2x2 pixel image and populates its pixel array (`$pxls`) with random color values.

The `Html Preparation Code` section defines the HTML structure of the canvas element.

**Test Cases**

There are two test cases:

1. **fillRect/concat**: This test case iterates over the `$pxls` array, selects every 10th pixel (due to the modulo operation), and draws a rectangle at the corresponding position using the `fillRect()` method with an RGBA color value generated from the selected pixel's color values. The image data object (`$px`) is not used in this test case.
2. **1×1 Image Data**: This test case iterates over the `$pxls` array, selects every 10th pixel, and uses the `putImageData()` method to draw a rectangle at the corresponding position using the same RGBA color value generated from the selected pixel's color values. The image data object (`$px`) is used here.

**Comparison**

The two test cases are compared in terms of performance:

* **fillRect/concat**: This approach uses the `fillRect()` method, which might be faster because it directly draws pixels on the canvas without the overhead of creating an image data object.
* **1×1 Image Data**: This approach uses the `putImageData()` method, which creates an intermediate image data object and then draws it on the canvas. This might incur additional overhead.

**Pros and Cons**

* **fillRect/concat**:
	+ Pros: potentially faster due to direct pixel drawing
	+ Cons: might not be as robust or flexible as using `putImageData()`
* **1×1 Image Data**:
	+ Pros: more robust and flexible, as it allows for more complex transformations and effects
	+ Cons: potentially slower due to the overhead of creating an image data object

**Library Usage**

The benchmark uses the Canvas API, which is a part of the HTML5 specification. The Canvas API provides a way to draw graphics on the web using JavaScript.

**Special JS Features/Syntax**

There are no special JS features or syntax used in this benchmark that would require additional explanation.

**Other Alternatives**

If you want to optimize this benchmark, you could consider the following alternatives:

* Using WebGL (Web Graphics Library) instead of the Canvas API, which might provide better performance for complex graphics rendering.
* Using a just-in-time (JIT) compiler or a JavaScript optimizer like V8 (used by Chrome) to optimize the performance-critical parts of the benchmark.
* Using a more efficient image data format, such as RGBA-32 or sRGB-10, instead of the standard RGBA-24 used in this benchmark.

Keep in mind that these alternatives might require significant changes to the benchmark and may not be necessary for a simple 2x2 pixel drawing test case.

Related benchmarks:

eSetting Canvas Pixel2 (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: fillRect/concat vs 1×1 Image Data

Created: 7 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

fillRect/concat

1×1 Image Data

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

No previous run results

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated one year ago):